Witness the latest Republican cave-ins to the progressive concept of big government -- a concept, we are told, that is allegedly anathema to GOP politics:

• Republicans have signed onto one of the largest expansions of federal law enforcement ever, agreeing with liberal Democrats on expanding the use of the U.S. military in dubious domestic capacities. In fact when it comes to expanding federal law enforcement, the GOP rarely has met a bill it didn't like.
• Some Republicans had to be coaxed into passing a tax cut bill -- one that only returns about three percent of the federal government's income over the next ten years. While Republicans are now "satisfied" with returning some $800 billion out of a projected $12 to 15 trillion back to taxpayers, they caved on allowing the destruction of the marriage tax penalty, even though the GOP's newest "Big Tent Pro-Family" philosophy is said to be stronger than the party's loyalty to Corporate America. Corporate America, however, got a 12 percent capital gains tax reduction.
• Republicans in the Senate have agreed to fund the Justice Department's legal vendetta against the tobacco industry, even though Republicans are routinely heard denouncing tobacco industry lawsuits and demanding that Americans afflicted with questionable "smoking-related illnesses" accept responsibility for their actions. This is odd, considering the Justice Department has been the Republicans' worst enemy in the fight to bring President Bill Clinton to justice for his various and sundry crimes against the State.
• Even though it was caught red-handed violating IRS tax rules which prevent nonprofit organizations from engaging in "purely partisan activities," Republicans in the House still want to give funding to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Donorgate has not changed this sentiment one iota, even though it confirmed to Republicans that the majority of Public Broadcasting System TV and radio stations hate their guts and want to see them destroyed politically.
• Republicans have consistently backed measures which usurp a citizen's right to privacy, while allowing the current administration to run roughshod over property rights, the right to protection against illegal search and seizure, the right of the people to be armed, and the right of the states to make their own laws. Continuing to fund the agencies that do these things amounts to de facto support.
• The Republicans could not even muster enough power to force the House to vote on a declaration of war in Yugoslavia. Worse, a large number of GOP members openly supported Clinton's decision to go to war with a sovereign country, violating precious U.N. rules governing conflicts with member states and NATO's own charter prohibiting offensive military action against a sovereign country.

There are more examples:

For instance, since the "party of smaller government" has been in control of the House and Senate, the U.S. budget has grown -- not decreased -- every year since 1994. Yet military expenditures continue to drop while spending on anti-conservative big government bureaucracy has increased. Inflation continues, as does the destruction of the public education system. And on and on.

Throughout all of this, many conservatives remain wedded to the Republican Party, buying the leadership's excuses that if the party faithful remain so "just a little bit longer," things will change. Bully.

The fact is most Republicans have been no friends of smaller government for decades. While the GOP was in the minority in the House and Senate, Republican presidents helped pass measures that increased the size and scope of the federal government. And now that the GOP has control of Congress, the Congress is helping to pass measures increasing the size and scope of the federal government. For all practical purposes, there has been little difference.

Granted, of the two major political parties Republicans more often vocally support issues favorable to life, liberty, freedom and the Constitution. But actions -- votes, in other words -- speak louder than words.

Besides, throughout the reign of the two-party system in American politics, there have been other political parties that have always supported these issues, using literal interpretations of the Constitution as their legislative guide. And at this point anyway, none of them are beholden to big corporate donors or other lawmakers who have something on them.

It is time for conservatives to shun the façade of political opposition that allegedly exists today within the Republican Party. The Constitution ought to be what defines political issues, not party "loyalty" or "the leadership" in the House and Senate. Either a candidate supports the literal interpretation of the Constitution or they do not.

It's as simple as that.